Split chassis

[Adrian Rosenlund]

Greetings one and all,

Some of the pre-owned models i've looked at are advertised as having 'split chassis', and i have a vague notion that these are not entirely desirable after reading here somewhere about Bachmann's Standard 2MT Tank (a new release without said split chassis, possibly? Don't really remember, as i only skimmed it).

Can someone explain to me what is meant by the term? I've absolutely no mechanical knowledge of models, and want to know if it's something to avoid or not.

Kindest regards

adrian

[2mmMark]

A split chassis is where each side of the chassis is electrically isolated. Power is conducted to the motor and/or decoder via the wheels, bearings and frame.

 

It's called "split" as there needs to be an insulating layer between the frames and on the axles.

 

The advantage is that there are no rubbing pickups to become dirty or out of adjustment.

 

I wouldn't automatically avoid one, they can be very good runners, as can non-split chassis.

 

The main problem buying used locos sight unseen is how well do they run? The vendor might be offloading a poor runner.

 

Mark

Edited June 21, 2017 by 2mmMark

[John M Upton]

With the split chassis models, Mainline in particular and carried on by Bachmann later, the main Achilles heel tended to be the plastic driving wheel axles which over time had a habit of becoming brittle and cracking leading to mechanical issues.  The other issue for many is that a split chassis is not DCC ready although can be converted but is a heck of a faff.

 

Fortunately as I continue to refuse to have anything to do with DCC then the old split chassis of Bachmann's 2MT tank does very nicely.

[timbowilts]

Mousa Models, aka Bill Bedford, do a set of replacement 3d-printed replacement parts to revive old Mainline split chassis. Haven't tried them myself yet.

 

Tim T

[The Johnster]

A 'normal' chassis picks up and returns current from and to the rails through the metal tyres of the driving wheels, which are on at least one side of the loco and usually both are insulated from the axles.  The backs of the tyres bear on (usually copper strip) pickups which have wires soldered to them to transmit the current to the terminals on the motor.  This is a tried and tested method of powering 2 rail DC model locos, and modern rtr chassis built to this design run very well indeed, smoothly, quietly, and controllable down to a very low scale speed, especially when run in.  This form of chassis was also the norm over 30 years ago, but performance was nowhere near as good as the models could not be mass produced to the rather fine engineering specifications needed to achieve good running of this sort.  For a while, there was effectively only one player in the rtr field, Triang Hornby, now Hornby, and their view was that their main market was the toy trainset trade and that perfect running was not of primary importance in this.  In the late 70s, a raft of new firms, Lima, Airfix, and Mainline ( Palitoy) came on the scene and rapidly left Hornby dead in the water as far as details and standards were concerned; this co-incided with many modellers of my generation being dissatisfied with Hornby's toy-like offerings and felt a bit out of our depth with the whitemetal kits which were the only alternative to scratchbuilding in those days; brass kits were just becoming popular and reckoned to be even harder, probably because the results looked seriously like scale modelling!

 

Of the newcomers, all had locos which outperformed and looked better than Hornby's by miles.  Airfix used more or less conventional metal chassis blocks with the 'normal' pickups, but the use of plastic gears made the running much more achievable within the price; it was comparable to modern standards but much noisier.  Plastic moulded 'keeper plates' of the type still used provided a level of detail beneath the footplates which was unprecedented on a British rtr model.  Lima were well established on the Continent as a budget rtr firm, and went one further step away from British modelling tradition by using a plastic chassis block, but were otherwise conventional; they were, it must be said, a bit lacking in underframe detail and had a nasty habit of making 0-6-0 steam chassis' with no crankpin to the centre driving wheels, which just floated around to no obvious purpose; they drove the rear axle and filled their cabs with motors, which is no more than Hornby Dublo had done for years. 

 

Palitoy Mainline broke the mould even further and, along with Airfix, are the ancestors of pretty much all modern rtr.  Mainline locos featured 'split' chassis, a method used by some scratchbuilderes in which the entire chassis was split into two sides, each of which fed current to a motor isolated from at least one of them.  The wheels were live, and mounted on stub metal axles which passed current through brass bearings to the chassis block on that side of the loco.  The axles fitted into an insulating central section and the separate halves of the chassis were fitted to insulating spacers.  This had several advantages,  There was no rubbing interface between the pickups and the rear of the tyres, so no braking or dragging on the wheels, which were much less susceptible to it at the interface which did pass the current, that between the stub axle and the brass bearing.  Mainline's mass produced version of this dispensed with the brass bearings and had the stub axles rubbing directly in 'U' shaped channels on the bottom of the chassis blocks.  New, they ran very well indeed, although some people had issues with haulage on some locos.

 

It looked like the best of all possible worlds; great detail, most cabs were free of motors and could be provided with an impression of the backheads, and smooth running, which was fairly quiet for those days as well.  A Mainline model, weathered and detailed up a bit, wasn't too different from the top end scrathbuilt version of the same thing.  Sadly, the initial promise was not backed up over time by the quality control of the materials used, or the original design specifications had not foreseen their degradation over time and exposed to mineral lubricants, and the models began to run into trouble on two fronts, both concerned with nylon plastic components.  Firstly, the insulating stub axles began to wear; they had square stubs with located into square holes on the metal wheels (or was it the other way around), and this wore until there was play in it.  Consequently, the wheels went out of quarter and the locos began to run like 3 legged dogs with all the legs different legs and facing different ways.  This happened even to locos that were used on light work and driven carefully; two of mine were destroyed by rough driving by a club member at an exhibition!  The gearing of these locos was provided by spur gears, not worn and cog (so was Lima's), and there was trouble with the gears splitting under load.  To cap it all, the chassis blocks were subject to mazak rot.

 

Palitoy went bankrupt in the 80s recession, not particularly due to model railway problems many of which were still in the future, and their model railway range was taken over by Airfix and another newcomer, Dapol trading as Replica Railways.  I am not clear on the history of rtr manufacturers from the 90s until about 2 years ago; my lifestyle was a bit disrupted and I was out of the game, but Lima backed out of the UK market, with some of their models being produced by Hornby, who were getting their own act together and starting to produce half decent, and then decent, rtr themselves.  Moulds changed hands and I lost track, but as a very, very, rough guide, Hornby are now producing their own work plus some models inherited from Airfix, and Bachmann are doing much the same with some models inherited from Mainline, both via Dapol or each other,

 

Split chassis locos still exist in a form, which is that of diesel or electric locos or multiple units which pick up current from separate bogies, each connected to current 'one side only'.  There are no separate pickups on these chassis' either. 

 

There is nothing wrong with split chassis per se, but they have proved to be too dependent on material performance to be worth pursuing in steam outline models by the current rtr players.  Bachmann and Hornby have provided completely new 'conventional' chassis for models in their range inherited, by whatever route, from the original Mainline range, while the body mouldings have stood the test of time and are still perfectly acceptable.  There is a very strong perception in the hobby nowadays that you are better off avoiding Mainline split chassis, which may appear in older Hornby, Dapol, or Bachmann models derived from the Mainline range; even if the chassis runs well now, it's probably got a limited useful life.   I would endorse this opinion, particularly for secondhand or eBay purchases; I have a chassis from a Mainline 56xx which still runs well, but it is on borrowed time as the front axles have almost worn through to the top of the chassis blocks, a fault which killed my Mainline 8750.  i have replaced the 56xx chassis with a modern Baccy one, which runs as near perfectly as anyone has the right to demand of a mass produced item!

 

If I was scratchbuilding a chassis, I would consider split current pickup, but would insist on brass bearings and a different fit for the stub axles.  It is possible to source replacement stub axles and spur gears for old Mainline cripples, but if you are not confident your ability to completely strip down a chassis to components they are not for you.  

 

Airfix produced a dog to avoid as well, their 14xx which was also put out by Dapol/Replca and Hornby.  This conventional chassis, on a loco that was a game changer when it first appeared and which ran extremely well, had unconventional pickups which were held in brass holders a little like miniature cartridge cases and were sprung so that they bore on the rear of the wheel tread. A spring sits in the holder and forces the pickup onto the tyre back, the pickup itself being a rolling bearing like a ball point pen.  You can see what Airfix were trying to do, as reliable pickup is problematic on a 4-coupled chassis as poorly balanced as in an 0-4-2T, but again it didn't work over time and is difficult to repair.  Another one to avoid on eBay.

Edited June 21, 2017 by The Johnster

[Gordon A]

A description and a picture of the split chassis locos would assist in giving you an accurate answer, as we have no idea what sort of loco you are talking about.

 

Gordon A

[Butler Henderson]

 

Palitoy went bankrupt in the 80s recession, not particularly due to model railway problems many of which were still in the future, and their model railway range was taken over by Airfix and another newcomer, Dapol trading as Replica Railways.

It was Airfix that went bankrupt and their range was taken over by Palitoy, while some stock in the Airfix warehouse was bought by David Boyle so starting Dapol. Palitoy ceased in 1985 when their US owners, General Mills, abandoned its European operations.

 

One split chassis OO model often overlooked is the Triang-Hornby Rocket.

Edited June 21, 2017 by Butler Henderson

[Andy W]

Palitoy went bankrupt in the 80s recession, not particularly due to model railway problems many of which were still in the future, and their model railway range was taken over by Airfix and another newcomer, Dapol trading as Replica Railways.  I am not clear on the history of rtr manufacturers from the 90s until about 2 years ago; my lifestyle was a bit disrupted and I was out of the game, but Lima backed out of the UK market, with some of their models being produced by Hornby, who were getting their own act together and starting to produce half decent, and then decent, rtr themselves.  Moulds changed hands and I lost track, but as a very, very, rough guide, Hornby are now producing their own work plus some models inherited from Airfix, and Bachmann are doing much the same with some models inherited from Mainline, both via Dapol or each other,

 

I'm afraid the history goes off beam at this point. Both Airfix and Palitoy had their model railway ranges manufactured under contract in Hong Kong, the key difference being that Airfix owned the tooling, while Palitoy had an arrangement with Kader Industries who retained all the rights to the tooling. It was Airfix that went bust first and was acquired by Palitoy. There were huge stocks of some Airfix items, but others were rerun by Palitoy with different liveries/running numbers, and some projects left part-completed when Airfix collapsed were brought to completion under Palitoy ownership - the Class 56, 2P 4-4-0 and Dean Goods are examples. The tooling for these was owned by Palitoy.

 

Then comes the closure of Palitoy. The Mainline brand, the stock of completed models, the ex-Airfix model railway kits and that part of the tooling directly owned by Palitoy were sold to David Boyle, who set up the Dapol company with his wife Pauline (guess where the name comes from) to market them. It's been said that he failed to understand the arrangement with Kader Industries and didn't realise that the biggest part of the Mainline tooling was not his. Nevertheless Dapol continued to sell the vast stock of models they had acquired, and introduced some new ones (J94 0-6-0ST, L&Y 0-4-0ST Pug, LBSC Terrier 0-6-0T). There may have been reruns of some models from that part of the tooling they did get.

 

Replica Railways was aware of who owned the bulk of the tooling, and commissioned Kader to rerun the GW 57xx Pannier and to complete the Palitoy projects outstanding - B1 4-6-0 and Modified Hall 4-6-0. There was a furious spat with Dapol, and it is believed it was only then Dapol realised what they had really bought, in the end all they got out of the argument was an acknowledgment slip in Replica boxes over the copyright design of couplings!

Kader and some of the ex-Palitoy designers, managers, and sales people saw a business opportunity and Bachmann Europe was set up to design and market products made by Kader using the tooling they owned. The designers were aware of the weakness of the ringfield motors used in the Mainline and Replica labelled products and produced a new split chassis design using a much better motor, a large brass worm, and a heavy mazak chassis, which was used as a replacement in new production and also sold separately so modellers could replace the chassis on their existing locos. Even this was a stepping stone and a further generation of chassis has appeared that is conventional rather than split. No split chassis locos have been manufactured for some years, and existing models are gradually either being retooled with the new design, or getting new design chassis to fit the previous body tooling. Most recently this was the Ivatt 2-6-2T and the Gresley V1/V3 2-6-2T. Others are in the pipeline.

To complete the saga, Dapol sold almost all of their OO loco, carriage and wagon ranges to Hornby to help fund N gauge development. Since then they have restarted OO loco production with the classes 52, 22, and 68, and more to come.

Edited June 21, 2017 by Andy W

[The Johnster]

I'm afraid the history goes off beam at this point. Both Airfix and Palitoy had their model railway ranges manufactured under contract in Hong Kong, the key difference being that Airfix owned the tooling, while Palitoy had an arrangement with Kader Industries who retained all the rights to the tooling. It was Airfix that went bust first and was acquired by Palitoy. There were huge stocks of some Airfix items, but others were rerun by Palitoy with different liveries/running numbers, and some projects left part-completed when Airfix collapsed were brought to completion under Palitoy ownership - the Class 56, 2P 4-4-0 and Dean Goods are examples. The tooling for these was owned by Palitoy.

 

Then comes the closure of Palitoy. The Mainline brand, the stock of completed models, the ex-Airfix model railway kits and that part of the tooling directly owned by Palitoy were sold to David Boyle, who set up the Dapol company with his wife Pauline (guess where the name comes from) to market them. It's been said that he failed to understand the arrangement with Kader Industries and didn't realise that the biggest part of the Mainline tooling was not his. Nevertheless Dapol continued to sell the vast stock of models they had acquired, and introduced some new ones (J94 0-6-0ST, L&Y 0-4-0ST Pug, LBSC Terrier 0-6-0T). There may have been reruns of some models from that part of the tooling they did get.

 

Replica Railways was aware of who owned the bulk of the tooling, and commissioned Kader to rerun the GW 57xx Pannier and to complete the Palitoy projects outstanding - B1 4-6-0 and Modified Hall 4-6-0. There was a furious spat with Dapol, and it is believed it was only then Dapol realised what they had really bought, in the end all they got out of the argument was an acknowledgment slip in Replica boxes over the copyright design of couplings!

Kader and some of the ex-Palitoy designers, managers, and sales people saw a business opportunity and Bachmann Europe was set up to design and market products made by Kader using the tooling they owned. The designers were aware of the weakness of the ringfield motors used in the Mainline and Replica labelled products and produced a new split chassis design using a much better motor, a large brass worm, and a heavy mazak chassis, which was used as a replacement in new production and also sold separately so modellers could replace the chassis on their existing locos. Even this was a stepping stone and a further generation of chassis has appeared that is conventional rather than split. No split chassis locos have been manufactured for some years, and existing models are gradually either being retooled with the new design, or getting new design chassis to fit the previous body tooling. Most recently this was the Ivatt 2-6-2T and the Gresley V1/V3 2-6-2T. Others are in the pipeline.

To complete the saga, Dapol sold almost all of their OO loco, carriage and wagon ranges to Hornby to help fund N gauge development. Since then they have restarted OO loco production with the classes 52, 22, and 68, and more to come.

 

Told you I'd lost track of some of it; didn't realise quite how badly!  All a bit Jeremy Kyle, isn't it, with spats and everybody getting into bed with everyone else.  I didn't even know that a new generation of split chassis models with better motors had been made.

 

Thank you for the clarification, Andy!  But so far as the OP's original query goes, I think it was right to point out the potential weakness of a secondhand Mainline or Mainline derived split chassis; presumably the early Kader/Bachmann chassis with the beefed up motors are still suspect as the stub axle issue wan't addressed and they are liable to mazak rot.  

[DCB]

Basically there are two commonly found breeds of 00 gauge split chassis locos, Mainline and Bachmann.

 

Both have the chassis made in two halves, a right half and a left half separated by insulated blocks and fitted with axles with an insulated section in the center.

 

Mainline had silly little motors embedded within the chassis halves and spur gear drives. Edit,[ Later ones had silly little pod motors. ] They sound awful and the motors need frequent fiddling because they are basically too small for the job.  However you can fiddle with them.   The Achilles heel is the axles which are circular and allow the wheels to slip and lose their "Quartering"  This is exacerbated by the wheels not making proper electrical contact with the chassis often due to the wrong oil.  If you have a working chassis where the wheels have not slipped then fitting brass shim pickups between chassis and the back of the wheels can stave off the problem for a very long time.   If the wheels have slipped round or the axles split Peters Spares do replacement axles but getting the quartering right is a challenge, ( and beyond me)

 

Bachmann updated the chassis to use a variety of can motors many with huge worm drive flywheels and crucially redesigned the wheels and axles to have square peg on the wheel engaging with a square recess in the axle so when the wheels come loose the quartering is not lost.

Peters Spares make replacement axles.   The Wheel journals are larger than Mainline and the drive is on different axles on some chassis so the Bachmann wheels and axles cannot be swapped for Mainline.  The motors seem to be the Bachmanns achillies heel, not user serviceable, I can't even get the Flywheel worms off without destroying the motors and replacements seem hard to find.

 

As far as I know all current Bachmann have abandoned the split chassis.

 

If buying a split chassis loco assume it will either work for a short period or not work at all.  Don't pay much for it.   If its got a Tender you can always chuck the motor away and push it with a Hornby Tender, if not you can stick it on a siding for decoration, build a wobbly etched chassis expensive motor gearbox chassis for it for mega bucks which will end up on a siding for decoration or like me adapt a 1961 Hornby Dublo or Triang Chassis to fit, good solid job but the Romford Markits wheels require a second mortgage, or better still buy the current Bachmann version. If you chuck away the DCC stuff and fill the space with lead ballast you end up with what Mainline intended back in 1978 or there abouts.   

 

Split chassis pick up is good for bogies and pony trucks as they run much freely than wiper contacts but the wheels and axles are hard to source but they do make a big difference to 0-4-4T and 0-4-2T loco haulage and to Tender Pickups, as used in the Grafar GP 5 of circa 1951!

Edited June 23, 2017 by DavidCBroad

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

 I've absolutely no mechanical knowledge of models, and want to know if it's something to avoid or not...

 Here's my suggestion based on 'Keep it simple'.

 

To get the best out of model railway, you do need some mechanism knowledge.

 

For now, focus on building up that experience with what dominates currently manufactured product: which is not split chassis.

[Barry Ten]

It's not all doom and gloom! I've got split-chassis Bachmann locos that are getting on for 20 years and still running fine. I have had my share of failures, but these seem to cluster around certain classes, eg, the two split-chassis Halls I've owned have both failed badly due to split axle muffs, and people seem to have mixed experiences with the LNER classes, in terns of both general running quality and longevity. On the other hand, my GWR moguls, manors, panniers, etc all seem to be wearing well, as do my Royal Scots and Lord Nelson. Last week I stripped and DCC-converted a 20 year old Ivatt 2-6-2T which remains an absolutely superb runner. My models don't get thrashed as I tend to run them for relatively short intervals before swapping them off the layout for a bit of variety, but isn't that what most of us do when we've ended up with more engines than we can accommodate? I'm not saying these models aren't without their issues, but I think the failure rate is sometimes over-stated a bit.

[The Johnster]

Barry makes a good point; you are more likely to hear people complaining about how their Mainline/Bachmann split chassis has let them down than saying that theirs is still running perfectly after decades of service. All the same, you need to be aware of the issues before buying a secondhand split chassis, even if it has never been run.  Check the quartering, check the gears, check the condition of the carbon brushes as they are becoming difficult to replace, check the condition of lubrication (it will have solidified on locos stored for long periods), and check the wear between the axles, especially the front one it it's a 57xx or 56xx, and the top of the chassis block; once the axle begins to wear a U shape in the top of the block, your model is dead and beyond resuscitating beyond a complete replacement chassis.  The current production Bachmann ones are not a simple replacement, and although they can be made to fit changes have been made to the body mouldings to accommodate them; fitting one to my old 56xx was a lot more of a faff than I thought it might be!

[corneliuslundie]

A little unfair on kit and scratch built chassis, where components are often available to make it a relatively simple option. If they wobble when built split frame they will wobble if they are built with pickups. But split frame makes it much easier to include compensation or springing.

However, from the content above I assume the original question was about RTR and I have no argument with what has been said.

Jonathan

[Adrian Wintle]

 

 

Split chassis locos still exist in a form, which is that of diesel or electric locos or multiple units which pick up current from separate bogies, each connected to current 'one side only'.  There are no separate pickups on these chassis' either. 

 

 

 

While it is not really on topic, the other place where split chassis have thrived is North American N-scale. A large majority of diesel and a lot of current steam locos make use of split chassis, and all-wheel pickup (or all drivers plus the tender for steam). Older Bachmann N-scale steamers had the same gear splitting issues as the OO locos mentioned above, though.

 

Adrian

Edited June 22, 2017 by Adrian Wintle

[John_Hughes]

While it is not really on topic, the other place where split chassis have thrived is North American N-scale. A large majority of diesel and a lot of current steam locos make use of split chassis, and all-wheel pickup (or all drivers plus the tender for steam). Older Bachmann N-scale steamers had the same gear splitting issues as the OO locos mentioned above, though.

 

Adrian

 

Not quite split chassis, but split current collection - on one side from the tender and the other from the loco - is an excellent system, and avoids most of the faffing about with muffs and all the rest of it.

[Butler Henderson]

Mainline had silly little motors embedded within the chassis halves and spur gear drives.  

 

That was the original arrangement Kader used on its production for Palitoy (Mainline)

 

Later models, the 57xx and Manor for example had a plastic pod motor instead.

 

Both motor types can be seen on this web page http://www.mainlinerailways.org.uk/Details.htm

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

A little unfair on kit and scratch built chassis, where components are often available to make it a relatively simple option...

 There is everything to like in the principle, and well executed with good quality components it is very successful.

 

The principal problems on the RTR split chassis steam models of Kader design and manufacture are in the design's reliance on very thin plating for conduction, and a weak plastic axle to form the driven wheelsets. If such models are used for regular operation, they wear out pretty swiftly. (If they are going to sit on a shelf or in a box, they last as long as any other constuction; my perspective is solely that of an enthusiast for operation, and once the plating is worn through they are 'finished' and this never took very long.)

 

There is quite a quantity of better designed current RTR OO that uses the split chassis principle very successfully: on non-steam traction and unpowered vehicles where it gets no attention because it simply works.

[Adrian Rosenlund]

Blimey Charlie seemed to have opened a bit of a can of worms. Still...not complaining. Extremely informative (as usual here on RMWeb), and as i too continue to refuse to have anything to do with DCC, i'll not worry about a loco having a split chassis as long as it's working well. Always a bit of a lottery buying used stuff, as i've already discovered.

As for knowledge of mechanics, i was thinking of acquiring a non runner to take apart and explore. I'd already thought that it might be as well to learn about the workings. Still trying to find a model rail club where i might find someone who can teach me about model locos, although the few people i've met who are, possibly not surprisingly, into HO Swedish themed electric and diesel. On a side note, if anyone's interested, there was still steam in limited use here in the mid seventies. The last steam pulled passenger service ran in 1965.

Thanks, all. Everything i needed to know and more.

[John Tomlinson]

 There is everything to like in the principle, and well executed with good quality components it is very successful.

 

The principal problems on the RTR split chassis steam models of Kader design and manufacture are in the design's reliance on very thin plating for conduction, and a weak plastic axle to form the driven wheelsets. If such models are used for regular operation, they wear out pretty swiftly. (If they are going to sit on a shelf or in a box, they last as long as any other constuction; my perspective is solely that of an enthusiast for operation, and once the plating is worn through they are 'finished' and this never took very long.)

 

There is quite a quantity of better designed current RTR OO that uses the split chassis principle very successfully: on non-steam traction and unpowered vehicles where it gets no attention because it simply works.

 

A thoughtful analysis, as ever.

 

The point about split axles is particularly well made. Not long a go I dismantled a current Bachmann NB Warship. This has split axles, i.e. metal wheels with an inner stub that push into a plastic joiner. This is also common practice on a lot of North American diesel models. We've no real idea how long the plastic joiner will last, as the properties of the plastic used will only be apparent over time. Had Mainline/ Replica/ early Bachmann used a plastic chassis block with isolated pick-ups for their chassis, rather than two pieces of metal, the construction principle would be identical to that still in use today. So "writing off" split chassis locos without some qualification has always struck me as rather high handed and ill informed.

 

The same blanket attitude applies to tender drives in locos. A common practice on the continent, and I challenge anyone to claim that the likes of Fleischmann are cheap and nasty. The problem in the UK is that they weren't so well done, hence the disdain with the product in practice.

 

John.

Edited June 24, 2017 by John Tomlinson

[melmerby]

Split chassis is alive and kicking.

Hattons DJ Models 48XX:

 

http://hattonsimages.blob.core.windows.net/mediaimages/14xx_instructions_spares1.jpg

 

And converting a split chassis to DCC, unlike a previous comment is easy.

All you do is isolate both contacts of the motor, take a feed off both sides of the chassis and connect the motor to the decoder.

As long as nothing touches to cause a short (use insulation tape) it's fine.

I've done a couple of Mainline locos, (BTW they didn't run any better with DCC!)

 

Keith

[Butler Henderson]

Split chassis is alive and kicking.

Hattons DJ Models 48XX:

 

http://hattonsimages.blob.core.windows.net/mediaimages/14xx_instructions_spares1.jpg

 

And converting a split chassis to DCC, unlike a previous comment is easy.

All you do is isolate both contacts of the motor, take a feed off both sides of the chassis and connect the motor to the decoder.

As long as nothing touches to cause a short (use insulation tape) it's fine.

I've done a couple of Mainline locos, (BTW they didn't run any better with DCC!)

 

Keith

The 48xx is of course dcc ready with a 6 pin socket.

 

If space exists on a Bachmann split chassis loco the safest way to dcc IMO is to site a piece of copper clad stripboard so that the wires from the motor are soldered to it and then those from the decoder. That way you can check for any short circuit with the chassis fully reassembled before connecting up the decoder (obviously the same thing can be done with two leads from the motor with the decoder then attached to those). Best to use heatshrink rather than insulation tape on any buried connection.

[melmerby]

 

 

 Best to use heatshrink rather than insulation tape on any buried connection.

I was thinking of the flat metal surfaces to keep such things as the decoder safe.

 

Keith